So, let’s say if someone writes a "helpdesk" program for modx (just using modx as an example) using modx APIs could somebody then go ahead and charge for it without releasing it through the GPL?Yep. That’s correct. However, if you modify the MODx API, you’re bound by the terms of the GPL to release those modifications.
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
If the program uses fork and exec to invoke plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs, so the license for the main program makes no requirements for them. So you can use the GPL for a plug-in, and there are no special requirements.
If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. This means that combination of the GPL-covered plug-in with the non-free main program would violate the GPL. However, you can resolve that legal problem by adding an exception to your plug-in’s license, giving permission to link it with the non-free main program.
Quote from: Carsten at Aug 12, 2005, 04:19 PMSo, let’s say if someone writes a "helpdesk" program for modx (just using modx as an example) using modx APIs could somebody then go ahead and charge for it without releasing it through the GPL?Yep. That’s correct.
However, if you modify the MODx API, you’re bound by the terms of the GPL to release those modifications.No. you don’t have to release the modifications. But if you do, you have to do so under the GPL. But you can still charge for them and refuse to give the mods to anyone who doesn’t pay. (But once you’ve given them to someone, they can pass them on for any price they choose.)
Here’s a better one though. You could build an entire service around MODx, significantly modifying the core and manager. Sell it as a monthly subscription for example, hosted on your own servers. As long as you maintain possession of the code and do not distribute it anywhere, I don’t think you have to release those modifications back, according to the letter of the law. License it to a 3rd party, though, and you would have to.Yes.
Neither am I , but I do deal with english contract law a lot at work. Note that’s *english* law - it’s different in scotland, and very different across the pond.
Take all my opinions though for what they’re worth and with a grain of salt. IANAL.
I was wondering about the legal ramifications of using Etomite snippets. Are all of the snippets automatically GPLd since they’re an extension of a GPL platform? Or do we have to deal with licensing on a snippet by snippet basis? Most of the snippets mention nothing of licensing, I don’t know if that means that we are free to use them or not.
I am especially ignorant of legal issues. I realy should get myself up to speed on licensing issues (but then again, ignorance is bliss)